Meade v. Silkworth

Fourth Circuit

Meade v. Silkworth

47 F. App'x 647

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided September 25, 2002·No. Nos. 02-1345, 02-1750·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Robert E. Meade appeals the district court’s orders denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaints. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinions and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm substantially on the reasoning of the district court. See Meade v. Silkworth, No. CA-02-558-MJG (D.Md. Feb. 26, 2002); Meade v. Silkworth, No. CA-02-1854-MJG; No. CA-02-1859-MJG (D. Md. June 4, 2002). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

Robert E. Meade appeals the district court’s orders denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaints. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinions and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm substantially on the reasoning of the district court. See Meade v. Silkworth, No. CA-02-558-MJG (D.Md. Feb. 26, 2002); Meade v. Silkworth, No. CA-02-1854-MJG; No. CA-02-1859-MJG (D. Md. June 4, 2002). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED.

Meade v. Silkworth, 47 F. App'x 647 (4th Cir. 2002).

Pincite

47 F. App'x 647 (Meade v. Silkworth) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related